Wow

On Mar 4, 9:23 am, Dudley Henriques wrote:

It's amazing how interested" the public gets in aviation when you show
them things like this.

--
Dudley Henriques

In this case, they're "interested in aviation" in the same way NASCAR
fans are interested in internal combustion -- "Gonna be a cool wreck
today??"

No matter how much reason you apply, the average person (non-pilot,
non-enthusiast) puts up with flying -- they don't like being "up
there."

And, if you think about it, you can't really blame them.

Dan

Michael wrote in news:3373f079-bf99-
:






You missed the point completely.


For the very last time, I was pointing out that the kick it straight
technique , so ably demonstrated in this clip is not the best way to go
whether it's done by a human, computer or chimp. Period. Endo of stoy. I
wasn't making any other point arguing anything else or entertaining any
other though. Finis Finito Spaghettio.



Bertie

On Mar 4, 10:12*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
You missed the point completely.

No, I don't think so.

For the very last time, I was pointing out that the kick it straight
technique , so ably demonstrated in this clip is not the best way to go
whether it's done by a human, computer or chimp.

That's the part I disagree with. This was not a good demo of the kick
it straigh technique. It was a great demo of how to do it wrong.
That's because the computer doesn't know how, and won't let the human
do it. AFAIK, the chimp is probably still at the board meeting.
Watching that video tells you absolutely nothing about the relative
advantages and disadvantages of the kick it straight technique. It
demonstrates nothing other than the peculiarities of some poor
software.

Michael

Michael wrote in news:8ea1fe91-e284-
:

On Mar 4, 10:12*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
You missed the point completely.

No, I don't think so.

For the very last time, I was pointing out that the kick it straight
technique , so ably demonstrated in this clip is not the best way to go
whether it's done by a human, computer or chimp.

That's the part I disagree with.


Be my guest.




Bertie

In rec.aviation.student Michael wrote:
You can not slip an A320 - not even down low.
Maybe, but it's besides the point.

Um, no - that is the point. If you can't slip, you have no choice but
to crab and kick it out. You mentioned some airplanes that could not
be slipped because of physical limitations (scraping engines and such)
but this is a plane that can't be slipped because of SOFTWARE
limitations.

This makes me curious. If it's true that you can't slip the thing, and if
cross control only confuses the software, why does it have rudder pedals
at all? It seems like if you're going to go this far, you may as well take
them out, maybe replace them with a miniature foot jacuzzi for the pilot,
and let the computer handle the rudder since that's what it does anyway.
Is it just there so people don't freak out, or do those pedals still serve
some useful purpose?

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

"Michael Ash" wrote in message
...
In rec.aviation.student Michael wrote:
You can not slip an A320 - not even down low.
Maybe, but it's besides the point.

Um, no - that is the point. If you can't slip, you have no choice but
to crab and kick it out. You mentioned some airplanes that could not
be slipped because of physical limitations (scraping engines and such)
but this is a plane that can't be slipped because of SOFTWARE
limitations.

This makes me curious. If it's true that you can't slip the thing, and if
cross control only confuses the software, why does it have rudder pedals
at all? It seems like if you're going to go this far, you may as well take
them out, maybe replace them with a miniature foot jacuzzi for the pilot,
and let the computer handle the rudder since that's what it does anyway.
Is it just there so people don't freak out, or do those pedals still serve
some useful purpose?

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

Evidently the Airbus software will allow you to use the rudder remove
the vertical stabilizer.

Al G

wrote:
On Mar 4, 9:23 am, Dudley Henriques wrote:
It's amazing how interested" the public gets in aviation when you show
them things like this.

--
Dudley Henriques

In this case, they're "interested in aviation" in the same way NASCAR
fans are interested in internal combustion -- "Gonna be a cool wreck
today??"

No matter how much reason you apply, the average person (non-pilot,
non-enthusiast) puts up with flying -- they don't like being "up
there."

And, if you think about it, you can't really blame them.

Dan



Well, you might not want to go quite as far as NASCAR. I know a lot of
people who are NASCAR fans. These people might be unique in racing.
If you put your theory up to them you just might get out alive by
dodging adeptly the empty Budweiser bottles coming your way.
:-))

--
Dudley Henriques

On Mar 4, 11:39 am, Dudley Henriques wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 4, 9:23 am, Dudley Henriques wrote:
It's amazing how interested" the public gets in aviation when you show
them things like this.

--
Dudley Henriques

In this case, they're "interested in aviation" in the same way NASCAR
fans are interested in internal combustion -- "Gonna be a cool wreck
today??"

No matter how much reason you apply, the average person (non-pilot,
non-enthusiast) puts up with flying -- they don't like being "up
there."

And, if you think about it, you can't really blame them.

Dan

Well, you might not want to go quite as far as NASCAR. I know a lot of
people who are NASCAR fans. These people might be unique in racing.
If you put your theory up to them you just might get out alive by
dodging adeptly the empty Budweiser bottles coming your way.
:-))

--
Dudley Henriques

True, true..

OK, SPRINT cars -- them folks i know is out fer blood!

Dan

Hi Michael.

On Mar 4, 7:26 am, Michael wrote:
On Mar 4, 10:12 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
....
For the very last time, I was pointing out that the kick it straight
technique , so ably demonstrated in this clip is not the best way to go
whether it's done by a human, computer or chimp.

That's the part I disagree with. This was not a good demo of the kick
it straigh technique. It was a great demo of how to do it wrong.
That's because the computer doesn't know how, and won't let the human
do it. AFAIK, the chimp is probably still at the board meeting.
Watching that video tells you absolutely nothing about the relative
advantages and disadvantages of the kick it straight technique. It
demonstrates nothing other than the peculiarities of some poor
software.
Michael

That software may have saved the plane, because
it knows the limitations of gyroscopic coupling that
the engines will force into the airframe and then
into the A/C attitude.

A *gentle* "kick it straight" from crabbing has limitations
of the rate of angular change, because you're torquing
large spinning turbofans, which act like gyros.

That sudden x-wind gust, took the landing way beyond
safe, or even possible. An ultra fast rotation applied by
the pilot may have throwen an engine, disengaged
blades, warped the airframe, overstressed bearings,
all of the above and more.

All and all, it was probably the best outcome to recover
from that anomalous gust....touch and go.
Ken
PS: I'd pay extra to have been on that plane!

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in
:

Hi Michael.

On Mar 4, 7:26 am, Michael wrote:
On Mar 4, 10:12 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
...
For the very last time, I was pointing out that the kick it
straight technique , so ably demonstrated in this clip is not the
best way to go whether it's done by a human, computer or chimp.

That's the part I disagree with. This was not a good demo of the
kick it straigh technique. It was a great demo of how to do it
wrong. That's because the computer doesn't know how, and won't let
the human do it. AFAIK, the chimp is probably still at the board
meeting. Watching that video tells you absolutely nothing about the
relative advantages and disadvantages of the kick it straight
technique. It demonstrates nothing other than the peculiarities of
some poor software.
Michael

That software may have saved the plane, because
it knows the limitations of gyroscopic coupling that
the engines will force into the airframe and then
into the A/C attitude.

A *gentle* "kick it straight" from crabbing has limitations
of the rate of angular change, because you're torquing
large spinning turbofans, which act like gyros.

That sudden x-wind gust, took the landing way beyond
safe, or even possible. An ultra fast rotation applied by
the pilot may have throwen an engine, disengaged
blades, warped the airframe, overstressed bearings,
all of the above and more.


Good grief.



All and all, it was probably the best outcome to recover
from that anomalous gust....touch and go.

Yes, I'm sure that's what you call a touch and go.


Ken
PS: I'd pay extra to have been on that plane!


Of course you would.


Bertie